Medical Marijuana USA – Page 3

9 May 2013

Medical Marijuana Dispensary Bans Upheld By High Court

posted in: Cannabis News | 0

California Supreme Court Rules Cities and Counties Can Use Zoning to Ban Pot Shops

The state Supreme Court decisively ruled Monday that cities and counties have the right to ban medical marijuana dispensaries from operating within their territory, but leading activists say their fight for easy access is not over.

“This is pretty much the end of the road, unless the state Legislature changes how much it allows the city to regulate,” said J. David Nick, who argued the dispensaries’ position in front of the high court and represents a few dispensaries in the Coachella Valley. He does not anticipate any sort of appeal. “You’re going to see some very specific legislation to address the decision of the court.”

The Supreme Court ruled 7-0 in favor of Riverside, which took the Inland Empire Patients Health and Wellness Center to court after it opened in defiance of that city’s ordinance banning dispensaries in 2009.

Since first filing a complaint the following year, Riverside has prevailed at the trial and appellate levels, but judges across the state have been handing down contradictory opinions on whether local governments could outlaw storefront dispensaries under California’s 1996 voter-approved medical marijuana act, the nation’s first.

The decision written by Justice Marvin. R. Baxter says nothing in the Compassionate Use Act of 1996 or the Medical Marijuana Program adopted by the state in 2004 overrode cities’ and counties’ zoning power, up to and including prohibition of storefront pot shops.

“Of course, nothing prevents future efforts by the Legislature, or by the People, to adopt a different approach,” the 38-page opinion concluded. “In the meantime, however, we must conclude that Riverside’s ordinances are not preempted by state law.” A concurring opinion was submitted by Justice Goodwin Liu.

Lanny Swerdlow of Whitewater has been a longtime medical marijuana activist in the Coachella Valley, and is the founder and a board member of the Inland Empire dispensary at the heart of the Supreme Court case. He agreed the fight now must return to the public arena, particularly the Legislature.

“We’re going to have to get better organized and work with our legislators to get new bills passed, because the courts have told us that the collective idea the Legislature came up with isn’t going to work,” he said.

That process has already started, he said, with one bill putting medical marijuana regulation under the state Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control.

Attorney Joseph Rhea, who represents open and closed dispensaries in Palm Springs, plus the shuttered Rancho Mirage Safe Access Wellness Center, said the open shops he represents will now close.

“I think the lawyers have done what they can here,” Rhea said.

Rancho Mirage City Attorney Steve Quintanilla said the ruling appears to reach beyond the issue of dispensaries by indicating there’s nothing in state law to stop cities from barring medical marijuana collectives and cooperatives, even if they distribute the drug to members without a storefront, as well as any kind of cultivation.

“I read the the part about collectives and thought, wow, they’re going farther than I thought,” he said. “Then I saw the section about cultivation and said, ‘Oh my God, they’re going even farther.’ ” He would not advise any of his cities to go that far, he said.

Rancho Mirage was the Coachella Valley city most affected by the crossfire of conflicting opinion on the issue, with its dispensary ban ruled invalid by a Riverside County Superior Court judge in 2011. The city appealed the ruling, which had been on hold since the Supreme Court first agreed to hear the Riverside case in January 2012.

Quintanilla, also the city attorney for Desert Hot Springs and deputy city attorney for Cathedral City, said the decision settles seven lawsuits pitting his cities against dispensaries trying to set up shop.

Palm Springs is the only city in Riverside County that allows limited dispensary operations. It holds the cap for such businesses to three, with plans to offer a fourth permit on hold.

The Supreme Court decision validates its efforts to close down more than a dozen illegal shops over the past several months, said City Attorney Doug Holland.

Since December, the city has been trying to close those collectives operating without a license by issuing them notices and fines for thousands of dollars.

So far, 12 dispensaries have closed. The city, though, is still battling with five operators – four of which have either preliminary or permanent injunction orders to close. The city has a court hearing soon on the fifth dispensary.

“We feel very confident that, based on the Supreme Court decision, there’s no room for these dispensaries … to argue that they have any right,” Holland said.

The argument used by illegal dispensaries is that state law – which allows the use of marijuana to people with a doctor’s prescription – pre-empts local law and gives them the ability to operate.

“The Supreme Court clearly said, ‘No, that’s not the case,’ ” Holland said.

The city will continue trying to close the remaining five, he said, which could eventually come to criminal charges if civil methods don’t work.

“Now we will also be looking at pushing our criminal remedies, which could be, in addition to fines, it could be jail time,” said Holland.

“These are guys that somehow seem to think they are above the law. The Supreme Court says, ‘No, they are not,’ ” he said.

According to the Weed-Maps.com website that shows dispensary locations across the valley, there are fewer dispensaries listed than a few months ago, but more delivery services.

The city is currently addressing only “bricks and mortar” operations, Holland said.

But he added that the district attorney and local law enforcement agencies could eventually decide to look at whether the delivery operations are being consistent with the Compassionate Use Act.

Julie Smith is a volunteer at C.C.O.C, one of the illegal dispensaries still open in Palm Springs. She said she didn’t have a problem with the court’s ruling because the decision should be made by individual cities, maybe through a vote of the people.

But there’s already a shortage of legal dispensaries between local bans and federal crackdowns, she said, which has helped C.C.O.C.’s membership grow to about 3,000.

“We’ve got people coming in from Riverside, Blythe, Arizona, San Diego, because all the ones in San Diego are being shut down,” she said.

C.C.O.C., 650 S. Oleander Road, is fighting Palm Springs’ efforts to close them down because “the city isn’t being responsible with how they’ve decided which stores do get the permit and those that don’t,” she said.

The city is choosing dispensaries in a way that lowers competition and increases prices, she said.

There is nothing in the court’s ruling stopping cities from allowing dispensaries to come in, and while the legal pressure has been on Cathedral City and Rancho Mirage recently, new slates of city council members have come in to cities farther east.

Indio Mayor Elaine Holmes said she’s never dealt with the issue in her 21/2 years on the council, though she remembers the issue being discussed in City Hall before she was elected.

Before taking a stand for or against allowing dispensaries in the city, “I’d have to see it on a case-by-case basis,” she said. “I’d need to know about the location, and a lot of other things. But I try to keep an open mind.”

Palm Desert Mayor Jan Harnik was elected to that city’s council at about the same time, after the city dealt with a dispensary on El Paseo.

“If anyone can show me how medical marijuana helps people who are really in pain, then I’m all for it,” she said. “But in that case, it should be through a pharmacy.”

Marijuana’s status as a Schedule 1 drug under federal law, along with heroin and cocaine, makes that impossible.

Rick Pantele is a representative of C.A.P.S., one of the three legally permitted dispensaries in Palm Springs. With the recent voter-approved legalization of marijuana in Colorado and Washington, he foresees the drug being legal nationwide in the next five to 10 years.

The momentum is headed that way, he said, even in California, “but this doesn’t help that at all,” he said.

Desert Sun reporter Xochitl Pena contributed.

Source: Desert Dispatch, The (Victorville, CA)
Copyright: 2013 Freedom Communications, Inc.
Contact: [email protected]
Website: http://www.desertdispatch.com/
Author: Blake Herzog

2 May 2013

Some Dispensaries Not Too Thrilled By Legal Pot

posted in: Cannabis News | 0

Medical marijuana groups are wary of a bill that would legalize and tax marijuana in Maine.

Estimates nationwide suggest if marijuana were legal, much of the profit gained by medical retailers and black-market criminals would disappear.

That worries Glenn Peterson, the owner of Canuvo, a Biddeford medical-marijuana dispensary. He also serves as president of the Maine Association of Dispensary Operators, a trade group made up of five Maine dispensary owners.

Peterson said his group is concerned that the bill could “eliminate the medical marijuana industry” in Maine.

“I tend to be libertarian,” he said. “On the other hand, I am quite protective of my dispensary.”

Paul McCarrier, a lobbyist for Medical Marijuana Caregivers of Maine, an advocacy group for state-licensed caregivers who grow marijuana for small groups of medical patients, said his group is opposing the bill. McCarrier said it would favor dispensaries through licensing requirements, which could regulate small-time growers out of existence.

“The scope of protections for the individual to cultivate for themselves is too limited,” he said.

The head of a national group that has supported the Maine bill and similar proposals nationwide says his organization has run into opposition to legalization from medical-marijuana groups in other states.

Allen St. Pierre, executive director of the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws, or NORML, said that “probably the most vexing thing that we’re facing right now ( in pushing for legalization ) is not the government or law enforcement agencies,” he said. “It comes from, oddly put, anti-prohibitionists versus anti-prohibitionists.”

The Maine bill to legalize marijuana, sponsored by Rep. Diane Russell, D-Portland, is a sweeping measure. Chiefly, it would allow those 21 and older to possess 21/2 ounces of marijuana and six plants.

It also would license cultivators, producers of products containing marijuana, retailers and laboratories, giving preference for licensing to officials at existing dispensaries.

David Boyer, Maine political director for the Marijuana Policy Project, a nationwide group backing Russell’s bill, said the provision to give preference to existing dispensaries was partially due to a drafting error in the bill, and he and Russell are open to amending it. Boyer has been lobbying legislators to support the bill.

Peterson said his group is lobbying for dispensaries to be granted automatic cultivation, retail and production licenses. He said it wouldn’t oppose the bill then.

McCarrier said it isn’t clear whether caregivers are on the same plane as dispensaries in the bill.

Russell’s bill would assess a $50-per-ounce tax on cultivators, 75 percent of which Russell has said she wants to divert to the state’s General Fund. Under her plan, the rest would go toward substance abuse programs, marijuana research and implementing the act.

Only two states, Colorado and Washington, have legalized marijuana, and they did so in 2012 referendum votes. Marijuana possession is illegal under federal law, so even states with medical-marijuana programs are running afoul of that law.

In those states and others, legalization efforts ran into patches of opposition from medical-marijuana groups as well.

St. Pierre suggested that’s because of economic protectionism: Simply put, when marijuana becomes legal, consumption will go up and prices will fall sharply.

McCarrier said it’s not about protecting money, but protecting “the ability for caregivers to continue to operate.”

Peterson said he sells marijuana for $360 per ounce; McCarrier said caregivers sell for between $175 and $250 per ounce. Street prices could be higher or lower.

A paper by a group of marijuana researchers published this month in the Oregon Law Review says the American marijuana market is a $30 billion industry annually. But modern farming techniques could supply that demand for “hundreds of millions of dollars.”

So, the paper says, most of those billions could be captured by businesses or states, but “only if competitive pressure does not drive prices down.”

Peterson said he has hundreds of thousands of dollars invested in his operation, and he’s not sure what would happen to it under legalization.

“I have no investors. I don’t take a salary,” he said. “But that’s what you have to do to have a program in this state.”

Medical marijuana wouldn’t be taxed at $50 an ounce, according to Russell’s proposal, and Boyer said he doesn’t want to affect the medical system “in any bad way.”

Still, “it’s kind of an evil trade-off,” Peterson said of the tax on recreational marijuana. “You can have it legally, but it’s going to cost you.” Russell has said the price drop after legalization would more than make up for the tax.

On taxes, a fine line would have to be walked to turn the average consumer to the new, recreational market. If the marijuana tax is too high, people will likely seek the black market or a doctor’s recommendation for patient status, say many working on tax proposals in other states.

Colorado and Washington are establishing regulations for their legal programs. They are seeking to establish a tax system that strikes those balances.

According to The New York Times, Colorado is considering excise and sales taxes of up to 30 percent combined on recreational marijuana. In Washington state, the Times said three levels of taxes will be levied on producers, processors and retailers. Consumers will pay a 44 percent effective rate.

The $50-per-ounce rate has been discussed in other places. California considered a bill that would use that rate in 2009, and lawmakers effectively killed it in 2010.

Beau Kilmer, a drug policy researcher for the RAND Corp., a nonprofit think tank, said there are a number of ways that regulators could tax marijuana, including per ounce and by the plant’s chemical makeup.

However, it’s too early to tell what would work best, so Kilmer suggests flexibility in the tax system.

“If large barriers are created to changing the taxes, it’s going to make it a heck of a lot harder to update them based on new research,” he said.

That lack of clarity makes Boyer, of the Marijuana Policy Project, wonder why some are opposing Russell’s bill so soon, before a legislative committee gets to amend it.

“I’m a little disappointed that some people are jumping the gun on this bill before it’s a final bill,” Boyer said. “I think everyone would benefit from ending marijuana prohibition.”

McCarrier said that philosophically, he could support legalization, but “the devil’s in the details.”

Peterson also said he could support the right plan, but “I would not want to do anything that disrupted the medical side of things. It really puts a death knell to the program.”

For St. Pierre, the NORML director, the schism is particularly divisive for the overarching cause of his group for years — totally legal marijuana.

“For me, it is a necessary but fascinating footnote in history that some of the most active opposition is oddly coming from those who are fellow travelers of the road, shall we say — those who enjoy and use marijuana, be it for medical reasons or recreational,” he said.

Source: Morning Sentinel (Waterville, ME)
Copyright: 2013 MaineToday Media, Inc.
Website: http://www.onlinesentinel.com/
Author: Michael Shepherd

28 Apr 2013

Federal Law Trumps Colorado’s on Medical Marijuana

posted in: Cannabis News | 0

A severely disabled man fired because of his after-hours medical-marijuana use has no legal recourse because the drug remains banned under federal law, a Colorado court ruled Thursday.

A three-judge panel of the Colorado Court of Appeals upheld 2-1 the firing of Brandon Coats, a quadriplegic who has a prescription for the drug in a state that permits medical marijuana, saying he was not protected from dismissal under the Colorado Lawful Off-Duty Activities Statute.

The statute prohibits employers from dismissing employees who engage in legal activity outside of work, but says nothing about those who violate federal but not state law.

“Plaintiff contends that we must read ‘lawful activity’ to include activity that is prohibited by federal law, but not state law,” said Chief Judge Janice Davidson in the divided opinion. “However, while we agree that the general purpose of [the law] is to keep an employer’s proverbial nose out of an employee’s off-site hours business we can find no legislative intent to extend employment protection to those engaged in activities that violate federal law.”

The case illustrates the ongoing tension between federal and state authorities as voters and legislatures move to legalize medical marijuana in violation of the federal Controlled Substances Act.

The conflict is likely to intensify after the passage of ballot measures in November approving recreational marijuana for adults 21 and over in Colorado and Washington.

Brian Vicente, a Denver lawyer and marijuana- decriminalization advocate, called the court’s ruling “disappointing” given the recent moves by Colorado voters to legalize medical and recreational pot.

“I thought it was an inappropriate reliance on federal law — the court used that as an ‘out’ to avoid a ruling based on state law,” Mr. Vicente said.

At the same time, he said, the ruling underscores the need for the state legislature to update the Colorado Lawful Activities Statute, which originally was intended to protect tobacco smokers from being fired.

“We call it ‘the smokers’ rights statute,’ but the court’s take was that Colorado needs to revisit this statute to incorporate medical and now adult recreational use,” Mr. Vicente said.

The Colorado legislature is now considering a package of bills designed to create a regulatory framework for recreational marijuana as required by Amendment 64, which won 55 percent of the vote in November.

Nearly 109,000 Colorado residents hold valid medical-marijuana registry cards. The most common medical condition cited for treatment is “severe pain,” reported by 94 percent of cardholders, followed by “muscle spasms” at 16 percent, according to the state Department of Public Health and Environment.

Mr. Coats worked as a telephone operator for Dish Network until he was fired in 2010 for failing a drug test in violation of the company’s drug policy.

In his lawsuit, Mr. Coats said he never used marijuana at work and was never under the influence of the drug while on duty.

Source: Washington Times (DC)
Author: Valerie Richardson, The Washington Times
Published: April 25, 2013
Copyright: 2013 The Washington Times, LLC
Website: http://www.washtimes.com/
Contact: [email protected]

17 Apr 2013

Illinois House Passes Medical Marijuana Bill

posted in: Cannabis News | 0

The Illinois House today approved a measure to let people use marijuana for medical purposes, giving the proposal its best chance of becoming law in recent years. The House sent the bill to the Senate on a 61-57 vote. The Senate previously has passed similar legislation. Proponents say the legislation, which would set up a four-year pilot program, would be the most restrictive in the nation. Seventeen states and the District of Columbia have approved some form of marijuana use for medical purposes.

The legislation, sponsored by Rep. Lou Lang, D-Skokie, had come close in the House but previously fallen short. Passing the House was viewed as the biggest hurdle in the legislature because the Senate previously has passed a similar bill, though not this year.

At the Capitol earlier today, Gov. Pat Quinn said he is “open-minded” on the issue. Quinn said he heard a story from a military veteran during a meeting in the governor’s statehouse office that provided compelling reasons to use cannabis for relief of pain.

“He was suffering from war wounds and found definite help by medical use of marijuana,” Quinn said. “I was quite impressed by his heartfelt feeling. I’m certainly open-minded to it.”

Marijuana, despite drawing questions and controversy, is seen by supporters as a progressive and safer alternative to harsh medication in treatments of various chronic illnesses like cancer, HIV or multiple sclerosis.

Under this bill, an individual could be prescribed no more than 2.5 ounces of marijuana during a two-week period. A doctor who prescribes marijuana must have had a prior and ongoing relationship with the patient—a move to lessen the chance that doctors could give out prescription weed willy-nilly.

Additional restrictions and regulations create numerous other hurdles before a person could get cannabis. The prescribing doctor must be licensed to practice in Illinois.

The House action comes after Cook County, the city of Chicago and some other cities have decriminalized possession of marijuana, allowing violators to be ticketed rather than booked into the jail.

Source: Chicago Tribune (IL)
Author: Ray Long and Rafael Guerrero, Tribune Reporters
Published: April 17, 2013
Copyright: 2013 Chicago Tribune Company, LLC
Website: http://www.chicagotribune.com/

16 Apr 2013

Medical Pot for Illinois Patients

posted in: Cannabis News | 0

In 1976, the idea that marijuana could be a medicine was generally taken as laughable. Then a glaucoma patient named Robert Randall won a court ruling that he needed the drug to keep from going blind. His case started a movement that could finally make headway here. The Illinois House is set to vote this week on a bill to allow the therapeutic use of cannabis.

Illinois is not exactly on the cutting edge here. California took this step in 1996, and 18 states now grant access. Polls have consistently found a large majority of Americans believe that pot has medical uses and should be available for doctors to prescribe for treating illnesses.

They have good reason for those convictions. In 1999, a panel of the federal Institute of Medicine concluded, “Scientific data indicate the potential therapeutic value of cannabinoid drugs . . . for pain relief, control of nausea and vomiting, and appetite stimulation.” The American Medical Association has urged the federal government to allow research on the medical uses of marijuana.

Illinois legislators have repeatedly declined to let patients gain access to a drug that many say offers relief they get from nothing else. But lawmakers finally may be ready to pass a bill sponsored by Rep. Lou Lang, D-Skokie, creating a process to allow access to those with serious medical needs.

The nice thing about the delay is that Illinois has had the chance to learn from the good and bad of policy in other states. Under this measure, patients whose doctors prescribe cannabis would be able to get it, but under sensible controls.

In California, often decried for lax regulation and wide-open access, patients can grow their own pot, get prescriptions from doctors who work at marijuana dispensaries and qualify for vague ailments. Lang’s bill is designed to make sure legalization of medical marijuana does not amount to de facto legalization of recreational marijuana.

To that end, it requires patients to obtain prescriptions from doctors with whom they have pre-existing and ongoing relationships, and only for specific conditions, including cancer, HIV and multiple sclerosis, but excluding pain and mental illness. Patients would have to register with the state health department, undergo a background check and get an ID card.

The number of dispensaries would be limited to avert an explosion of storefront outlets, and they would be barred near schools, playgrounds and churches. Patients would not be allowed to grow their own pot, unlike in California. They would be permitted only 2.5 grams every two weeks — also unlike the Golden State, which imposes no limit. The bill requires drivers suspected of using pot to submit to field sobriety tests, on pain of having their licenses suspended.

It’s important to give doctors and patients the freedom to use cannabis for whatever medical value it has. It’s also important to treat it as a potent drug whose unchecked proliferation can bring troublesome side effects. This bill does both, and it deserves to pass.

Source: Chicago Tribune (IL)
Published: April 16, 2013
Copyright: 2013 Chicago Tribune Company, LLC
Website: http://www.chicagotribune.com/

13 Apr 2013

New Stricter State Proposal Would Allow MMJ

posted in: Cannabis News | 0

Lawmakers have introduced a measure with stricter provisions than past failed efforts to legalize marijuana sales to New Yorkers who have a “severe debilitating or life-threatening’’ health condition.

The new bill, which ends such past ideas as letting people grow their own marijuana, would have the state Health Department regulate the process, which would include allowing a certain number of private for-profits or not-for-profits to grow the plants and sell the drug under new security protocols to patients with treatment plans approved by a physician, physician’s assistant or nurse practitioner.

The measure was introduced by its past sponsors, Assemblyman Richard Gottfried, a Manhattan Democrat, and Sen. Diane Savino, a Staten Island Democrat. Savino has more political power this year as one of five breakaway Democrats who jointly run the Senate with Republicans.

The bill has 68 co-sponsors, including 10 Senate Democrats. It has previously sailed through the Assembly.

Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo has opposed the idea of medical marijuana legalization, though advocates believe he could be flexible, especially since he is already promoting a plan to relax marijuana possession laws. Eighteen states and the District of Columbia have medical marijuana laws.

Advocates say the measure will more strictly regulate the drug than prescription painkillers; patient advocates in the past have said marijuana will be cheaper, less addictive and less dangerous than many of the painkiller prescriptions they take.

The bill defines those eligible to be certified by the Health Department to obtain marijuana as someone with a “serious’’ health condition, including cancer, glaucoma, multiple sclerosis, spinal cord injuries, epilepsy, diabetes, post-traumatic stress syndrome and others.

The patient would have to be under a doctor’s supervision. Patients who a doctor believes have less than a year to live also would be eligible to buy the drug. Medical marijuana also would be listed as one of the covered drugs on a new state prescription drug tracking system intended to reduce doctor and pharmacy shopping by addicts.

Marijuana could be grown and dispensed by hospitals, for-profit companies and not-for-profit corporations, and an excise tax would be imposed on the facilities, with part of the proceeds shared with local “host’’ communities.

“The bill is much more restrictive than the New York laws regulating highly dangerous drugs like morphine, Oxycontin or Valium,’’ Gottfried said.

“Anybody who ever had a family member suffer from a debilitating disease learns very quickly the limitations of modern medicine at treating pain,’’ added Savino.

The bill’s backers include the American Public Health Association, American Bar Association, New York State Nurses Association, Pharmacists Society of the State of New York, New York AIDS Coalition, the Independence Party of New York and the Drug Policy Alliance.

Critics, including some Senate Republicans and the state Conservative Party, have said marijuana could be diverted by patients to others not eligible for the drug and that the plan sends the wrong message, especially to teenagers, about a drug some call a gateway to stronger drugs.

Source: Buffalo News (NY)
Author: Tom Precious, News Albany Bureau
Published: March 28, 2013
Copyright: 2013 The Buffalo News
Contact: [email protected]
Website: http://www.buffalonews.com/

13 Apr 2013

Bill Introduced in Congress Would Fix MMJ Conflict

posted in: Cannabis News | 0

A bill introduced in Congress on Friday would fix the conflict between the federal government’s marijuana prohibition and state laws that allow medical or recreational use.

California Republican Rep. Dana Rohrabacher said his bill, which has three Republican and three Democratic sponsors, would assure that state laws on pot are respected by the feds.

The measure would amend the Controlled Substances Act to make clear that individuals and businesses, including marijuana dispensaries, who comply with state marijuana laws are immune from federal prosecution.

“This bipartisan bill represents a common-sense approach that establishes federal government respect for all states’ marijuana laws,” Rohrabacher said in a news release. “It does so by keeping the federal government out of the business of criminalizing marijuana activities in states that don’t want it to be criminal.”

Eighteen states and the District of Columbia have medical marijuana laws, and two states, Washington and Colorado, last fall became the first to pass laws legalizing, taxing and regulating marijuana.

The U.S. Justice Department has not said how it intends to respond to the Washington and Colorado votes. It could sue to block legal pot sales from ever happening, on the grounds they conflict with federal law.

President Barack Obama has said going after marijuana users in states where it’s legal is not a priority. But the administration has raided some medical marijuana dispensaries it sees as little more than fronts for commercial marijuana sales.

Several other measures have also been introduced to change U.S. marijuana laws, including moves to legalize the industrial production of hemp and establish a hefty federal pot tax in states where it’s legal. Any changes this year are considered a longshot.

Republican Reps. Justin Amash of Michigan and Don Young of Alaska and Democratic Reps. Earl Blumenauer of Oregon, Steve Cohen of Tennessee and Jared Polis of Colorado co-sponsored Rohrabacher’s bill.

Source: Associated Press (Wire)
Author: Gene Johnson, The Associated Press
Published: April 12, 2013
Copyright: 2013 The Associated Press

31 Mar 2013

New Stricter State Proposal Would Allow MMJ

posted in: Cannabis News | 0

The bill has 68 co-sponsors, including 10 Senate Democrats. It has previously sailed through the Assembly.

“The bill is much more restrictive than the New York laws regulating highly dangerous drugs like morphine, Oxycontin or Valium,’’ Gottfried said.

“Anybody who ever had a family member suffer from a debilitating disease learns very quickly the limitations of modern medicine at treating pain,’’ added Savino.

Source: Buffalo News (NY)
Author: Tom Precious, News Albany Bureau
Published: March 28, 2013
Copyright: 2013 The Buffalo News
Contact: [email protected]
Website: http://www.buffalonews.com/

30 Mar 2013

Cannabinoids And Cancer

posted in: Cannabis News | 0

The Stone-Cold Truth

I got a good bit of reaction to my last piece on cannabis and cancer, so I want follow up on it before moving on to other subjects. Obviously, many folks out there are suffering and seeking relief, but I don’t want to peddle false hope; there is already too much of that going on. However, if you already have a death sentence hanging over your head then you pretty much have nothing to lose.

One of the major medicinal advantages of cannabis, the clinical name for marijuana, is the absence of significant and unintended side effects ( no major harms ) associated with its medicinal use 3/4which is a lot more than can be said for many pharmaceutical drugs that come with a laundry list of side effects, which sometimes include death.

That said, the website of the National Cancer institute has recently added a page titled “Cannabis and Cannabinoids” [cancer.gov/cancertopics/pdq/cam/cannabis/patient/page2]. The information on that page cites preclinical studies that indicate the following “antitumor activity” of cannabinoids ( the active substances in the marijuana plant ):

Studies in mice and rats have shown that cannabinoids may inhibit tumor growth by causing cell death, blocking cell growth, and blocking the development of blood vessels needed by tumors to grow. Laboratory and animal studies have shown that cannabinoids may be able to kill cancer cells while protecting normal cells.

A study in mice showed that cannabinoids may protect against inflammation of the colon and may have potential in reducing the risk of colon cancer, and possibly in its treatment.

A laboratory study of delta-9-THC in hepatocellular carcinoma ( liver cancer ) cells showed that it damaged or killed the cancer cells.

A laboratory study of cannabidiol in estrogen receptor positive and estrogen receptor negative breast cancer cells showed that it caused cancer cell death while having little effect on normal breast cells.

It’s not about just a toke or two:It’s no wonder that people who have been told they are terminal are willing to try cannabis in an attempt to save themselves. However, it is important to note that neither smoking, vaporizing nor eating cannabis-infused brownies alone can deliver an effective dose of cannabinoids to have the kind of effect patients are looking for from the plant.

That’s where something like Rick Simpson’s Hemp Oil comes in. It’s a highly concentrated cannabinoid extract that Simpson and others claim has wondrous results, including its ability to cure many different cancers.

I can’t independently verify that claim, but when used along with conventional cancer therapy it seems to help. After my last Higher Ground column about cannabis and cancer, a 66-year-old San Francisco woman named Michelle Aldrich contacted me. Aldrich, and her husband Michael, have been longtime marijuana activists and received the High Times magazine lifetime achievement award in June 2011, so she’s obviously predisposed to have a favorable outlook about the herb, but her story is very compelling.

Aldrich was diagnosed with cancer in late 2011. Further testing revealed lung cancer, three cancerous lymph nodes, a spot on her kidney and inflammation in her colon ( three polyps ) 3/4Stage 3A poorly differentiated non-small cell metastatic ad-enocarcinoma of the right lung with bulky lymph node involvement 3/4in January 2012.

Her main tumor was 30 by 31 millimeters. The five-year survival rate for this type of cancer is about 25 percent. Her doctors recommended that she undergo chemotherapy. They would have added radiation except her lymph nodes were too close to her trachea for that. The goal was to shrink the lymph nodes enough so doctors could operate and remove two lobes of her right lung. Aldrich agreed to the course of treatment but was up front with her medical team that she was going to take what she called Milagro Oil, a variation of the Simpson extract, along with their recommended course of action. In fact, she put together a complete holistic approach to dealing with her cancer.

“I needed to set a new course. A course correction,” she said in a talk she gave at the sixth annual Women’s Visionary Congress in July 2012. The talk was adapted and published in the spring 2013 edition of O’Shaughnessy’s, a journal focused on medical cannabis.”I needed to change my destiny. I did not want to die of lung cancer. I would do everything possible to restore my health: diet, chemo, acupuncture, and cannabis oil. I knew I had a wonderful support group and a dream team of doctors.”

The oil she took contained 63 percent THC – she says it didn’t get her high – and she also used a CBD tincture. Aldrich’s diet was strict: no dairy, sugar, wheat, alcohol or meat, except chicken once a month. She said she ate a lot of fish, especially salmon.

Aldrich started chemo in early February and had the last of four courses on April 5, 2012, although she continued taking oil until mid-May. An April 17, 2012 CT scan showed the tumor had shrunk by 50 percent. On May 10, 2012, a PET scan showed no discernible cancer and her lymph nodes had completely shrunk. She had surgery to remove the lymph nodes and the remains of the tumor which was “a thin rim surrounding a necrotic core.” In other words, it was dead. Aldrich still suffered some of the bad effects of chemo such as nausea and loss of appetite, but in the end her primary doctor was amazed at the result.

“He had never seen lung cancer totally eradicated by chemo, much less in four months,” said Aldrich. “I assume cannabis oil was the factor that made the difference.”

Cancer is not considered “cured” until it has been absent from a patient for five years, and doctors are loath to say that anyone’s cancer is cured, but testimonials such as Aldrich’s are becoming much more common.

Spread the word:Alternet, an alternative news service, picked up her story and distributed it last week; and testimonials of people’s claims of having cured several types of cancer or other ailments with some variation of Simpson oil can be easily found on the Internet.

Variations abound, with some folks adding other healing herbs that they trust to the mix, but the main ingredient is cannabis, preferably an indica strain. They’re claiming healing or relief for Multiple Sclerosis, rheumatism, arthritis, psoriasis, eczema, diabetes, seizures, migraines and more.

“Anybody who looks at the sheer amount of these materials cannot deny that cannabis extract deserves mainstream medical attention immediately,” says Justin Kander, a board member of Phoenix Tears ( phoenixtears.ca ), the Rick Simpson organization that promotes cannabis oil.

“People don’t have time to wait for all the proper scientific channels. We’ve been waiting years, and millions of people have died. With pain, people don’t have a day to wait,” Kander explains. “They don’t have 10 seconds to wait. It’s irresponsible to hold it back. The extract seems to work for virtually any condition. That makes it less believable. In theory, the reason that it works for so many things is the endocannabinoid system ( cannabinoid receptors in the human body ) maintains balance in the other systems. All disease is some form of imbalance. We need to investigate this further through science.”

In the meantime, a lot of people have decided not to wait. They don’t have time.

We’ve been peddled various snake oils in the past. So I would advise caution when treating yourself or a loved one, and it’s advisable to use cannabis oil in tandem with conventional therapies. The bottom line is it may work, it may not work, but it won’t harm you. And as they say on the playground – no harm, no foul.

Hash Bash: The 46th Annual Hash Bash will take place noon-1:30 p.m. on Saturday, April 6. Mason Tvert, who let the successful Colorado legalization drive, will headline the program along with NORML founder Keith Stroup, growing expert Ed Rosenthal and cannabis seed developer DJ Short.

Source: Metro Times (Detroit, MI)
Copyright: 2013 C.E.G.W./Times-Shamrock
Contact: [email protected]
Website: http://www.metrotimes.com
Author: Larry Gabriel

30 Oct 2012

Citing Compassion, Backers Want Medical Marijuana

posted in: Cannabis News | 0

A vote for an item on the Nov. 6 ballot to legalize medical use of marijuana in Arkansas would enable cancer patients and other people suffering from chronic conditions to get relief when other drugs aren’t diminishing their suffering, backers of the measure argue.

But opponents, ranging from police organizations to the conservative Arkansas Family Council lobbying group, argue the drug would fall into the hands of people with no legitimate need it and are campaigning against the measure.

The group Arkansans for Compassionate Care organized the signature drive and fought a legal battle that followed to get the measure on the ballot.

Cancer survivors and family members of people with painful medical conditions have helped the organization get its message out that marijuana used medicinally can be of great benefit to people with pain, nausea and other chronic ailments.

Jerry Cox, director of the Arkansas Family Council, led a late drive to urge people to vote against the measure, arguing that the intent of the ballot item is to make marijuana as widely available as possible.

If approved, the measure would set a framework to allow dispensaries to provide up to 2.5 ounces of marijuana to patients who got a doctor’s approval to use the drug. The proposal would make it legal for people to grow their own medical marijuana if they live more than five miles from a dispensary.

The proposal didn’t draw organized opposition until October, when Cox started rallying groups to publicly condemn the measure.

The state Chamber of Commerce, the Arkansas Sheriffs Association, the Arkansas Association of Chiefs of Police and the Arkansas Pharmacists Association have all registered their opposition, as did state Drug Director Fran Flener.

Gov. Mike Beebe and Attorney General Dustin McDaniel each said they would vote against the item but said they wouldn’t campaign against it.

Arkansans for Compassionate Care has raised more than $289,000, with most of the money coming from the Washington, D.C.-based Marijuana Policy Project.

Dr. David Smith, a palliative care specialist with Baptist Health Medical Center in Little Rock, noted that a lot of the money supporting the measure has come from outside the state.

About a dozen doctors appeared with Smith at a news conference last week where they urged voters to oppose the measure, saying backers are citing “bad science” in arguing for the drug’s effectiveness.

“So-called medical marijuana is not a scientifically valid way to relieve pain or suffering,” Smith said.

Gary Fults, president of Arkansans for Compassionate Care, disagreed.

“We can come up with just as many reports saying its good science as they can saying its bad science,” Fults said.

Fults urged asks that voters strive to find independent information about medical uses of marijuana.

“You’ve just got to go out and get the information yourself, educate yourself about the issue. We recommend that everybody read the initiative … instead of listening to all the rhetoric that’s out there, ours and theirs,” Fults said.

The 8,000-word initiative goes into great detail about how marijuana would be dispensed and stipulates that users with a doctor’s clearance couldn’t be prosecuted under state law. Marijuana would remain illegal under federal law.

Fults said the group has worked to enlist physicians to publicly support their cause but he said doctors don’t want their names associated with the initiative because they could lose their hospital privileges.

“We’re working on that right now. We’re trying to find someone who is independent of the hospitals that could speak out for us,” Fults said.

During its petition drive and subsequent campaign, the organization brought forth numerous people who said they were able to get through chemotherapy and endure other conditions only with the help of marijuana.

The ballot item has gotten the attention of Arkansas voters.

The Arkansas Poll, conducted by the University of Arkansas, surveyed 800 people and has a margin of error of plus or minus 4 percentage points.

The poll showed that 44 percent of voters favored the measure and 52 percent were opposed with 5 percent voicing no opinion or refusing to answer when the poll was taken Oct. 9-14.

Source: Associated Press (Wire)
Author: Chuck Bartels, Associated Press
Published: October 29, 2012
Copyright: 2012 The Associated Press

« 1 2 3 4 »